Applied to the Giants, it refers to the on-the-field product. The business side - and the owners’ net worth - is in fine shape.
I’d define “Crisis” as: an extended recent period of bad, losing performance combined with a lack of confidence in the team’s future direction.
Quote:
In comment 15380390 Go Terps said:
Quote:
I used the word "crisis" to describe the team back in 2019 at some point or another. Some poster (I think it was arcarsenal) have me a real hard time about using that word to describe the state of the team.
I do believe the team is in a state of crisis. They are shaped by decisions made in an incompetent front office, and the decisions continue to be incompetent with as yet no sign of substantive change. They look and feel like a 5-12 team (that may be generous looking at their schedule) - yet again we'll be talking about a "crucial" offseason on January that will "determine the direction of the franchise".
My concern is the Giants do not really understand the facts. I think there is a ton of internal lying done each year about how poor they've been, how close they are, who is to blame, etc.
That's made the past few years even worse for me.
They clearly don't. If you read posts by the gidie, Britt in VA, FatMan in Charlotte, Big Blue 56, and others (credit to gidie for not vanishing) that blindly wave the "Why not us? The arrow is pointing up!" banners - that is basically a mouthpiece for what is being said inside the front office.
There is no master plan to guide decision making and to evaluate those decisions. There is only a half-assed identification of a problem (Daniel needs weapons!) and a reaction to that problem (Overpay Golladay, overpay Rudolph, overdraft Toney). Then that fails, another problem is identified as the root cause, and then moves are made to react to that perceived root cause. Rinse and repeat.
The Giants are a dike with holes in it, and the front office's solution to the rising water is to put its fingers in the holes. Not enough fingers though, and even if they had them they aren't smart enough to identify the right holes.
If that's not a crisis, I don't know what is.
Terps.. I am not sure Golladay was an overpay. Golladay is a great football player. The problem I see is that Jones hasn't figured out how to play with him, and by extension Judge and Garrett. Getting this guy involved should be job one on offense. And just because Golladay's game is contested catches, doesn't mean that throwing it up for grabs is how you play with him. First of all, because of his size and athleticism, he is open when he doesn't seem open. I think Jones is not seeing he is *open* because he thinks Golladay needs more separation. Then when Golladay is open Jones needs to deliver the ball right away. We see Jones is holding the ball too long and getting the ball there late. Finally, even though Golladay is a contested ball expert, the ball still needs placement. You can't just throw it anywhere. Jones is not placing the ball to Golladay in the right spots. This is a problem in Jones' game that we don't talk about much. His ball placement on short/intermediate passes is not very good. he has nice touch over the top and on deep floaters, but he has inconsistent timing, anticipation and placement everywhere else on the field.
I'm frankly surprised this wasn't job one and getting Golladay on the same page with Jones isn't more apparent.
So what you hear from me is my opinion based on my observations and that's it. Calling me a mouthpiece for the Giants is patently false and I indignantly deny this.
I will not disappear. In the unlikely event that I am totally wrong I will own up to it. I can handle being wrong.
However in the instant case, while it may be easy to panic and declare doom, it is way too premature to rush to
that judgment.
Let's look at one thing here that the above contingency of doomsayers have been totally wrong about so far this year. Daniel Jones. Ha -- can't say he didn't have huge upswing this year so far can you. Notice they are back to moaning about the front office. Not a word about Jones -- Why? because Jones looked damn good last thursday -- his fantasy ratings are off the charts. Lol -- who's wrong about that boys?
The answer is None of us knows just yet, and really none of us knows how this team is going to do this year just year just yet. So keep your frikken pants on, and sit in the seats with me and watch it unfold. It's absolutely possible that you all have it wrong still.
So what you hear from me is my opinion based on my observations and that's it. Calling me a mouthpiece for the Giants is patently false and I indignantly deny this.
I will not disappear. In the unlikely event that I am totally wrong I will own up to it. I can handle being wrong.
However in the instant case, while it may be easy to panic and declare doom, it is way too premature to rush to
that judgment.
Let's look at one thing here that the above contingency of doomsayers have been totally wrong about so far this year. Daniel Jones. Ha -- can't say he didn't have huge upswing this year so far can you. Notice they are back to moaning about the front office. Not a word about Jones -- Why? because Jones looked damn good last thursday -- his fantasy ratings are off the charts. Lol -- who's wrong about that boys?
The answer is None of us knows just yet, and really none of us knows how this team is going to do this year just year just yet. So keep your frikken pants on, and sit in the seats with me and watch it unfold. It's absolutely possible that you all have it wrong still.
Nobody can deny that Jones played a great game vs Washington. It was the best game of his career. I said on the game thread he was the best Giant on the field that night, and Terps agreed. But what really mafde him so good in that game was the 95 yards rushing and Washington's inability to defend it. I think that level of rushing success is unsustainable. But if he can keep that level up, we'll have to re-evaluate our assumptions about Jones. But I don't think he's going to run for 1600 yards.
It lulled them into either a sense of complacency or thinking they knew what they were doing who knows which one, but it’s set the franchise back immensely.
Something similar happened to the Bruins after their SC win and SC appearance a couple of years later. The GM and HC didn't adapt to the changing NHL, and there was a lot of sentimental contracts handed out to the guys from the SC team. A couple years of missed playoffs and the GM got booted. New GM kept the HC but the team still sucked. Finally fired the HC and they started adapting to modern hockey and became perennial contenders again.
Although many aren't particularly happy with how last season ended so seats may be getting warm up at the TD Garden again.
Quote:
Super Bowl run was one of the best and worst things that could have happened to this franchise.
It lulled them into either a sense of complacency or thinking they knew what they were doing who knows which one, but it’s set the franchise back immensely.
Something similar happened to the Bruins after their SC win and SC appearance a couple of years later. The GM and HC didn't adapt to the changing NHL, and there was a lot of sentimental contracts handed out to the guys from the SC team. A couple years of missed playoffs and the GM got booted. New GM kept the HC but the team still sucked. Finally fired the HC and they started adapting to modern hockey and became perennial contenders again.
Although many aren't particularly happy with how last season ended so seats may be getting warm up at the TD Garden again.
I think there is truth in this. The *Giants way* of football is not the best and most efficient route to success. the game has changed. Defense is less important. Rushing is less important. it is more of a finesse game predicated on passing. You're not going to maul your way to a Super Bowl unless you have at least a very good offense, and you still probably need a top-8 QB. Sure Tampa Bay mauled KC, but they also had Tom Brady and a high octane passing game that got them there.
And against Denver he was awful.
0-2. 8-20 as a starter.
And against Denver he was awful.
0-2. 8-20 as a starter.
The Kurt Warner break down was more an indictment of scheme than Jones performance. Even when Warner disagreed with a scheme, the majority of times he agreed with a Jones decision in that game. But it still was Warner's opinion.
No matter what you think the results right now are inconclusive either yea or nay. You cannot decide a whole season in two games -- especially given how preseason worked this year. impossible.
And against Denver he was awful.
0-2. 8-20 as a starter.
I am aware of Jones' deficiencies as a passer. I listed them above.
1) doesn't see *open*
2) late on the delivery
3) inconsistent placement
and you can add difficulty reading the field.
He was great on Thursday because of his running. He is more Lamar Jackson than Matt Stafford. Not many QBs ever run for 95 yards. That's the game and system the Giants should adopt for him, imo.
I know I'm repeating myself but not getting on the same page with Golladay is a worrying sign for Daniel Jones - the passer. His fate as a starting QB rests on making that work, unless he can rush for 95 yards every week.
It lulled them into either a sense of complacency or thinking they knew what they were doing who knows which one, but it’s set the franchise back immensely.
They had a negative point differential during the regular season that year. they should have known they didn't have a dominant team on their hands. Didn't help Reese botched the next few drafts.
It’s fair to say that Jones had a good game Thursday - both the eye test and the stats support that. But it wasn’t a great game. It’s what a solid NFL QB is expected to do these days.
Quote:
The victory laps are premature
as are the doomsday ones
So far the Jones naysayers have been more right than the pro Jones crowd. There’s been more games like Denver and worse, than like Washington and we’re in Year 3. The odds favor the naysayers being right.
It’s fair to say that Jones had a good game Thursday - both the eye test and the stats support that. But it wasn’t a great game. It’s what a solid NFL QB is expected to do these days.
cosmic -- the only point I was making was that it was a marked improvement from game 1 -- hence it was upward trajectory
Quote:
I said Jones played well in Washington - he didn't play as well as I thought.
And against Denver he was awful.
0-2. 8-20 as a starter.
The Kurt Warner break down was more an indictment of scheme than Jones performance. Even when Warner disagreed with a scheme, the majority of times he agreed with a Jones decision in that game. But it still was Warner's opinion.
No matter what you think the results right now are inconclusive either yea or nay. You cannot decide a whole season in two games -- especially given how preseason worked this year. impossible.
How preseason worked this year was an organizational choice. They could have played Jones more.
I would have won at Saratoga this year if they were.
If your only point is Jones looked better in game 2 versus game 1 and those two frames of reference constitute an upward trajectory then I would stipulate.
Would hope the more important context is how the team, as a whole, is progressing.
It’s fair to say that Jones had a good game Thursday - both the eye test and the stats support that. But it wasn’t a great game. It’s what a solid NFL QB is expected to do these days.
Your last paragraph is spot on. Jones did play pretty well. But because the bar for his play has been lowered by so many - like he's a sixth round pick, not the 6th overall pick - last Thursday's performance gets distorted.
If you listen and watch that Warner review closely, he's more critical of Jones overall. Yes, he finds issues with Garrett and the receivers; but he's very lasered in on some QB101 problems Jones continues to exhibit.
I watch Jones and hope he can make a play. ANY play. I watch a Mahomes/Rodgers/Wilson/Herbert/Jackson/Carr/etc and I expect them to make a play. I get surprised when they don't. It's such a difference in QB play.
And I continue to believe Jones was a huge beneficiary of Cutcliffe's coaching and schemes at Duke. He just wasn't that special...
Lose, Lose, Lose.
It seems Mara should get out of the decision making, let someone else take his role and he move into a Tisch role.
We need the modern George Young to emerge.
However, in the NFL, all you have to do is hire 53 players and the money pours in like a waterfall.
The laws of supply and demand have no application here.
The Giants are a fucking joke.
Giants kept it close against a mediocre Washington team with a gimp QB who was out out football a year ago - - and the pom pom wavers proclaim the Giants are on their way up.
Who are the young impact players - - Jones with his constant fumbles and inexplicably dumb decisions? Overdrafted Barkley who won’t block and shies away from contact? Joke Toney? Blake Martinez?
Anybody want to pretend those four are “franchise” players?
In a few months, the “upward trajectory” crowd will be scratching their heads wondering how the Giants finished 5-12.
Quote:
Giants are 0-2 for the fifth year in a row. Any upward trajectory that doesn't result in additional wins is worthless.
And improving over the performance over Denver is such an incredibly low bar.
I'm not sure I agree with you -- Denver put another good game out there in game two -- they may be better than the general consensus
WTF! Denver beat Jacksonville? Sheezus! Even if true...how does that help your point. We got our ass handed to us by a good (not great) Denver team? Doesn't that mean the Giants aren't good?
Enjoy this week...but dont look at the schedule for the 6 weeks after. Just curious...if we start 1-7 or 2-6, will you still see "iprovement?"
Enjoy this week...but dont look at the schedule for the 6 weeks after. Just curious...if we start 1-7 or 2-6, will you still see "iprovement?"
And the answer is: I'll let you know. If they are improving they are improving -- if they aren't improving they aren't -- as of right now I saw improvement from game one to game 2. It certainly ain't perfect.
The same goes for analysts that have actual expertise and experience playing or coaching in the NFL. Fans take what meat looks good, and discard the rest.
The same goes for analysts that have actual expertise and experience playing or coaching in the NFL. Fans take what meat looks good, and discard the rest.
If they didn't think they were getting an honest conversation, wouldn't they have disappeared earlier? I'd argue that the optimists ignore the data (i.e., the awful record the past four years) and essentially ask "What if we actually do good things for once" instead of rely on fact-driven arguments.
Most of the optimists have been optimistic and wrong for years.
Quote:
"disappearing" probably has more to do with the lack of honest conversation than being afraid to face being "wrong". Data is treated with bias here far too often. Data that goes against arguments are disregarded; data that is for arguments is welcomed with open arms.
The same goes for analysts that have actual expertise and experience playing or coaching in the NFL. Fans take what meat looks good, and discard the rest.
If they didn't think they were getting an honest conversation, wouldn't they have disappeared earlier? I'd argue that the optimists ignore the data (i.e., the awful record the past four years) and essentially ask "What if we actually do good things for once" instead of rely on fact-driven arguments.
Most of the optimists have been optimistic and wrong for years.
I would say each individual has their own threshold of when something is no longer worth the time and effort.
I think both sides do a very good job of ignoring data that points away from one's argument. The issue is: When anyone decides that data or a reputable opinion is worthless before waiting to see how it turns out probably is not being honest.
As for fans being right about the quality of the team. Yes, fans have guessed right. The thing is, teams plenty times enough turn around from good to bad and bad to good with h little notice, which means some fans are always looking for signs that the situation is improving, while other fans are on-guard for warning signs. Both are valuable, more valuable when honest.
Agreed on people ignoring the data on both sides.
Agreed on people ignoring the data on both sides.
Brett, maybe so. There certainly is much competition on this forum (which I'm not a fan of) which influences posters to yell from the mountain when they see signs they are\were right. For the most part I'm a Kumbaya fella, where I would prefer to discuss topics sans the arrogance of "told ya". Fighting arrogance with arrogance does not lead to good places in my view.
Just to be clear, I am not saying that I do not have my own arrogance issues, because I do.
Quote:
Enjoy this week...but dont look at the schedule for the 6 weeks after. Just curious...if we start 1-7 or 2-6, will you still see "iprovement?"
And the answer is: I'll let you know. If they are improving they are improving -- if they aren't improving they aren't -- as of right now I saw improvement from game one to game 2. It certainly ain't perfect.
Improvement from one game to another isn’t actually improvement. Lots of NFL teams play good games every now any then, that’s why it’s so hard to go winless. Improvement is if they play like they did against Washington 5 or 6 times this year.
Quote:
I think those same posters would be here if we were 2-0 pounding their chest.
Agreed on people ignoring the data on both sides.
Brett, maybe so. There certainly is much competition on this forum (which I'm not a fan of) which influences posters to yell from the mountain when they see signs they are\were right. For the most part I'm a Kumbaya fella, where I would prefer to discuss topics sans the arrogance of "told ya". Fighting arrogance with arrogance does not lead to good places in my view.
Just to be clear, I am not saying that I do not have my own arrogance issues, because I do.
IMV one side resorts to calling people that disagree with them assholes, miserable fucks, etc., and because of that I can't agree with them and their takes on the Giants, and they definitely deserve a hearty dose of "told ya so" after years lf berating others
They never had interest in honest conversation.
Fatman was a dick who resorted to name calling whenever he was wrong. Even attacking people’s careers.
As long as this team is losing this place will be a sewer. We are a disappointed fan base. Some want to yell at the clouds and some want to pretend it isn't that bad. Just two ways of dealing with the same problem.
It's a shame too, because everyone I called out by name here is a knowledgeable poster and obviously a die hard fan. The discourse on this board from all of them - and me - has fallen off a cliff.
Quote:
I used the word "crisis" to describe the team back in 2019 at some point or another. Some poster (I think it was arcarsenal) have me a real hard time about using that word to describe the state of the team.
I do believe the team is in a state of crisis. They are shaped by decisions made in an incompetent front office, and the decisions continue to be incompetent with as yet no sign of substantive change. They look and feel like a 5-12 team (that may be generous looking at their schedule) - yet again we'll be talking about a "crucial" offseason on January that will "determine the direction of the franchise".
My concern is the Giants do not really understand the facts. I think there is a ton of internal lying done each year about how poor they've been, how close they are, who is to blame, etc.
That's made the past few years even worse for me.
I think this is spot on. I think many in the Giants front office are "optimists" and they believe the team is on the cusp of turning things around, and they are not looking at the facts.
Mara is not a football guy and he relies on the people doing the job to inform his assessment of the job they are doing. This is why Reese stuck around after Coughlin was let go. It's why Gettleman stays around while McAdoo and Shurmur are let go. The voice closest to Mara is the one influencing the decisions.
Yup.
You know, 15-20 years ago, a popular pastime around here was mocking Redskins fans for their delusions that the team was finally turning things around. Remember this?
We'd laugh at them for their blindness to the reality of their franchise. Now, it's something a lot of Giants fans do.
If this is in regards to FMIC, he’s the cesspool not the negativity.
Quote:
he's not here because he doesn't come around when the Giants are losing -- he does not like negativity -- he's always been that way --- and let's face this place is a cesspool of negativity after losses
If this is in regards to FMIC, he’s the cesspool not the negativity.
ajr -- you are clearly not from around here - you are as misinformed about this as most of your other comments
Quote:
In comment 15380390 Go Terps said:
Quote:
I used the word "crisis" to describe the team back in 2019 at some point or another. Some poster (I think it was arcarsenal) have me a real hard time about using that word to describe the state of the team.
I do believe the team is in a state of crisis. They are shaped by decisions made in an incompetent front office, and the decisions continue to be incompetent with as yet no sign of substantive change. They look and feel like a 5-12 team (that may be generous looking at their schedule) - yet again we'll be talking about a "crucial" offseason on January that will "determine the direction of the franchise".
My concern is the Giants do not really understand the facts. I think there is a ton of internal lying done each year about how poor they've been, how close they are, who is to blame, etc.
That's made the past few years even worse for me.
I think this is spot on. I think many in the Giants front office are "optimists" and they believe the team is on the cusp of turning things around, and they are not looking at the facts.
Mara is not a football guy and he relies on the people doing the job to inform his assessment of the job they are doing. This is why Reese stuck around after Coughlin was let go. It's why Gettleman stays around while McAdoo and Shurmur are let go. The voice closest to Mara is the one influencing the decisions.
I'd add, I think it's funny how we start to see the PR machinations once the chosen scapegoat is prepared to be sacrificed. Shurmur's firing and DG staying was choreographed through the media. We started to see positive articles on DG late last year. Stuff like that.
I also find it a little amusing how easily it's bought by some fans here. We still have people blaming the problems on coaching. We all saw the hype Judge received on this board last year, especially compared to Shurmur... But it only resulted in two extra wins vs. against a worse division and more backup QBs.
Lastly, Mara's long-term orientation and patience is something I view positively. The most successful franchises have it: PIT and BAL, for example. Those franchises have made numerous investments in scouting/analytics - areas I suspect the Giants are lacking.
Amongst others.
The Giants are a Vortex of Suck. To turn this thing around, they need to approach it systematically, not by scapegoating a couple of people in some sort of tribal shaming ritual.
Launch a formal search for a new GM, hire that person and give them carte blanche to return the franchise to excellence,
The Giants are a Vortex of Suck. To turn this thing around, they need to approach it systematically, not by scapegoating a couple of people in some sort of tribal shaming ritual.
Launch a formal search for a new GM, hire that person and give them carte blanche to return the franchise to excellence,
I generally agree, but Gettleman should be fired immediately. Not as a pound of flesh for the fans, but because he may be less willing to trade players he brought in (I'm thinking specifically of Barkley).
This perfectly sums up the state of the franchise.